Apparently this is for interactive use, and merely replaces this handler script
```sh
#!/bin/sh
echo $1 >> /path/to/file
```
Sure, it writes to the file directly instead of spawning <=10 (usually just one) subprocesses. However, if you're that stingy with resources, is something written in Python really the right tool for you? Not convinced.
Meanwhile, to do any postprocessing at all, you at least need another program “listening” on the output file, using it like a poor man's socket, unless I'm misunderstanding something. With such a complicated setup, is it really worth making a two-line script built-in (other than saving a few subprocesses, which as I said I'm not worried about in the least)?
Therefore, my conclusion is I don't recommend adding yet another option that's weirdly specific and likely won't get much adoption outside of one person to our already long list of options, unless a more convincing use case is presented.